Month: August 2018
Denial changes nothing and everything
Republika Srpska President Dodik Tuesday got the entity’s Assembly to revoke a 2004 report that confirmed its army’s murder of about 8000 mostly men and boys near Srebrenica in 1995.
The Assembly action changes nothing. The murders occurred, most of the remains have been identified, and the murderer in chief, Ratko Mladic, as well as his political overseer Radovan Karadzic have been convicted at the International Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. Dodik and his minions cannot change the facts or undo the convictions. The mass graves containing bodies with hands tied and gunshot wounds to the back of their heads do not disappear because of a speech or a resolution in an Assembly.
At the same time, it should change everything. Genocide deniers should have no place in power in post-war Bosnia and Herzegovina. Most of the country’s population cannot be expected to tolerate official acts that challenge the dignity and humanity of mass murder victims. Dodik has confirmed what his enemies always say: Republika Srpska is founded on atrocities against its enemies that it denies and should not have been allowed to continue to exist after the 1995 peace agreement.
It was however permitted to remain, as one of two constitutional “entities” within Bosnia and Herzegovina, occupying 49% of its territory with a population that is now 83% Serb due to ethnic cleansing during the war and resistance to non-Serbs returning after the war. There is nothing that can be done to change that, short of renewed warfare no one wants.
Dodik should not however get off untouched. The Americans have already levied travel and financial sanctions against him. They should now expand those to include all members of the Republika Srpska National Assembly who voted to revoke the Srbrenica report. The Europeans need to act as well. They have been hesitant about sanctioning individuals, partly due I understand to judicial challenges. If it is impossible to reach agreement at the level of the European Union, individual European states should prohibit travel and financial sanctions by all supporters of revoking the report. The US and EU should also join together in denying World Bank funding for projects in Republika Srpska, until it reinstates the Srbrenica report.
Some will argue this would be over-reacting. If the Assembly action changed nothing, why should anyone get excited about it? The answer is that Dodik and his minions are pushing the envelope. They are trying to see how far they can go without precipitating a serious response. They have made it eminently clear that their escalation ladder will culminate in a declaration of independence from Bosnia and Herzegovina, a move that is guaranteed to restart the war and absorb gigantic international resources. It would be far better to stop the escalation now than to let it go further.
Dodik has been emboldened in part by talk about “border correction,” “land swaps,” and “ethic partition” in Kosovo. German Chancellor Merkel ruled out border changes in the Balkans earlier this week, but the Americans have still not been heard from on the subject. They need to speak out forcefully against such propositions. Doing so would not only calm the situation in Kosovo but also send a clear signal to Dodik and his Russian backers.
It is hard to get excited about anything in the Balkans these days, as the rest of the world is in such miserable shape. The State Department has issued a strong statement. But words no longer suffice. Stopping instability before it starts and grows is far cheaper and easier than intervening afterwards. Dodik menaces a peace that has held for 23 years. The Americans and Europeans can still stop him from creating havoc. They should do it.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Thaci’s message to Serbia
Marija Stojanovic of Belgrade daily Danas has kindly provided permission for me to publish in English this interview with Kosovo President Hashim Thaci, which appeared today:
WE WILL NOT ALLOW CREATION OF REPUBLIKA SRPSKA IN KOSOVO
Thaci: “We are in a critical period of dialogue between our two countries. As leadership responsible to well-being of our children, I think both President Vucic and myself are keen not to allow for past to block our future or to threaten peace in our region in five or fifty years.
I have entered politics at a very young age, as a student leader and I always said I have three political aims: firstly to liberate Kosovo from the Serbian military and police occupation; secondly to make Kosovo an independent and sovereign republic and thirdly to ensure we become equal members of NATO and EU” – has stated for Danas Kosovo President Hasim Taci, discussing about Brussels negotiations with Serbian President Aleksander Vucic on solution of Kosovo question.
Both Presidents of Kosovo and Serbia have in recent weeks started talking about a border demarcation or adjustment. Both of you have also indicated that the final agreement between Belgrade and Pristina, will be painful. Yet, public knows very little about the progress in your dialogue in Brussels, or event the framework of any such agreement. Can you tell us more about the expectations you have about the final agreement?
– Kosovo is already a moral and political victor because our people are free. They live in a free country, recognized by overwhelming number of UN members. But we now must move rapidly towards locking our place in NATO and UN. Dialogue with Serbia, regional cooperation and reconciliation are crucial conditions for this aim.
I am not talking to Belgrade because of some sort of nostalgia. I don’t suffer from Yugo-nostalgia like some do. Nor do I talk to Belgrade because I like spending time in corridors of Brussels, eating cold sandwiches until late hours of evening. No – I’m talking to Vucic and I’m keen to find a solution because I want to see us in NATO and EU, sooner rather than later. I’ll be very honest, I don’t think we will get there until we have undisputed and unquestioned border between two countries. We have to have a fully agreed border demarcation, so we don’t leave some open issues to become point of dispute in the future.
My aim is not some ethnic partition, nor is [it] creation of a second Republika Srpska in our territory – heaven forbid – my aim is to settle the 400km of border and that process may require creative solutions that will provide peace now and in the future.
Yet, you have stated recently that you want to help Presevo valley Albanians join Kosovo as part of this dialogue? Why open this issue now? Never before has this issue been opened in Brussels? Do you think Belgrade will allow to give territory without getting something substantive back?
– Presevo valley, people of these three municipalities have already expressed their desires and their political aims in a referendum in 1992. It’s clear that any border demarcation between two countries will matter to these families and these citizens. Their interests must be respected and taken into account. There is an old saying: “if there is a will, there is a way.” Well, I believe that if there is a will among leadership in Kosovo and Serbia to find creative solutions, we will find a way to accommodate people in these border regions to feel safe, secure and with economic and political future secured. Both Serbs in north Kosovo as well as Albanians in Presevo valley care most about jobs and economy. Who will invest in our countries if we have open border questions lingering for decades? How will we prevent our young people to leave if they have to face discrimination or fear every 10 years or every 20 years?
Mr President, if we may insist, we are still missing concrete descriptions of solutions? Are you and Vucic speaking on top of maps, with coordinates of the villages and borders like in Dayton or what is the process happening now?
– Rest assured, last thing in my mind is Dayton. I have declared independence of Kosovo as a sovereign, secular and civic republic. Civic it shall remain. Maps will not define the destiny of people. People will define destiny of maps. Former Yugoslavia has been dissolved and there are seven states that were created from that bloody process that was initiated solely in Belgrade – when people in some circles in Belgrade started obsessing with maps and memorandums. That obsession with maps brought mayhem and genocide.
The final agreement between Kosovo and Serbia will be European agreement. It will be endorsed by both Brussels and Washington. And it will be finalized with a new UN resolution in UNSC, to open EU perspective for both Kosovo and Serbia. Either this will be a European solution with EU and US support or there will be no deal.
What happens if there is no deal? Many people both in Serbia but also in Kosovo, have stated that it’s better to keep status-quo? Will there be violence?
– Status-quo is a long-term invitation for trouble. Criminals, populists, nationalists, third parties from outside our region – they are seeking status-quo to operate and to undermine Europe, NATO and overall Western establishment. Balkans is secure today, we even had some progress, like the fantastic deal between Greece and Macedonia as well as Montenegro accession to NATO; but we can’t stop without finalizing all open bilateral issues.
I don’t fear violence today. I’m worried by the propaganda in Belgrade that some sort of plan is being prepared by Kosovo police or army to enter into war, or “take over north”. This is stupid and dangerous. Kosovo police and Kosovo army are trained by NATO, by EU and they are respectful of Euro-Atlantic values. But if we don’t solve the relationships now, we are wasting the opportunity for another generation or two to have normal life.
Why to postpone solution, if both sides are ready to close painful chapter of past? Why to leave our children hostages of mythical, historic dreams? It’s clear that Kosovo and Serbia are separate countries. But it’s also clear that they are neighbors that must talk and resolve open disputes.
Do EU and US support your stance? There are mixed signals coming from EU capitals. London and Berlin have been vocal against border adjustments. Washington is staying silent. Moscow is following carefully.
– We are having in dialogue in Brussels and there are always representatives of US government in all stages of dialogue so both EU and US support a mutual agreement between Kosovo and Serbia, there is no doubt about it.
I could say that we have lacked [a] bit of focus – especially from Brussels – but the world is a difficult place and it’s becoming more difficult. I don’t have illusions like some people do, thinking we are center of the world and everyone has to listen to our wishes and our demands. No, we have a very narrow window of opportunity and very little bandwidth in major capitals to deal with Kosovo-Serbia dialogue. So we must use this opportunity while there is time and willingness with our allies to close the deal and support the final deal.
What will happen to southern Serbs in Kosovo if there is border adjustment? Many people fear exodus like in “Oluja” in Croatia?
– This is an orchestrated propaganda. No one will touch dear Serbs in south, north, west or east of Kosovo. There was also propaganda when we declared independence in 2008, that Serbs will leave in tractors but they didn’t. They stayed in Kosovo, and they even participated in the creation of Kosovo institutions, police, parliament, constitutional court.
Serbs are today integrated and I don’t see any reason for people in Strpce or Gracanica or anywhere to fear their future in Kosovo. A final deal between Prishtina and Belgrade will help them because it will diminish threats from nationalists and extremists from their own Serbian community that hang over their head. I’m using this interview again to call all Serbs, all minorities in Kosovo to rest assured that their country is Kosovo and they have secured future in this country.
Will Serbian Orthodox Church receive same assurances?
Serbian Orthodox Church is a constitutional category in Kosovo and receives constitutional protection. Unfortunately, it’s sometimes most politicized of organized religious communities in Kosovo as some bishops, especially some extremist ones from outside Kosovo, send very unfortunate messages. I never respond to these statements, as I don’t want to put the position of Serbian clergy in Kosovo in a political landscape. I try to protect them from their own.
I’m very proud of the diversity of heritage in Kosovo and I have promoted interfaith dialogue as a key component of reconciliation. Prizren, Decan, Orahovac are beautiful and touristic places also because of rich diversity, Albanian, Serbian, Turkish, Bosniak. The major communities in Kosovo, like Muslims, Orthodox, Catholic, Jewish, Sufi – they were here during Ottoman Empire, during Serbian occupation, during Yugoslavian dictatorship and they will be here in the future. Read more
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Even discussion can destabilize
I did a long interview with Pristina daily Kosova Sot Monday, before I’d heard about Chancellor Merkel’s statement ruling out border changes in the Balkans. It was published today:
- Recently, the Kosovo President has discussed the topic of separation in talks with Serbia as well as the idea of the territory exchange. How do you value this?
A: I don’t like it. No country worthy of European Union membership needs to trade away part of its population. Equality under the law has to apply to everyone.
- President Hashim Thaci is insisting for, as he says, a border correction, by taking the Presevo Valley by Kosovo, but Thaci does not mention what Serbia wins in such a case. How do you comment president Thaci’s policy, knowing the fact that he, until recently, was against partition and border changes?
A: I imagine he is responding to President Vucic’s frequently expressed interest in the four northern municipalities in Kosovo. There can be no one-way swap. It has to be an exchange.
- Kosovo’s constitution prohibits Kosovo from joining another country while specifying where the borders are. Does that mean that President Thaci is violating the constitution?
A: Anyone can propose an amendment to the constitution. Advocating one does not violate the constitution, but it does put the President in an awkward position of not appearing to defend something he has sworn to uphold.
- This year, it was necessary to set aside the Special Court that will judge the former KLA leaders, who are today in the main political positions in Kosovo. For many, the opening of territorial bargaining with Serbia is also seen as a consequence of the fear of justice and a kind of bazaar but how much can it be true in this middle and according to you why the Special Court is not yet operating?
A: I think the Special Court is operating, it just hasn’t brought any indictments. You’ll have to ask them why not. I know of no reason why discussion of land swaps would prevent such indictments. Do you?
- Do you feel that Trump administration has a change of attitude regarding the partition of Kosovo?
A: The change of attitude is not so much about partition as about whether such things should be discussed, or not. An ethnic nationalist Administration, which is what the U.S. currently has, finds it harder to rule out ethnic nationalist solutions like a land swap than a liberal democratic Administration, like those of Obama, Bush and Clinton.
- There is news that even Prime Minister of Albania Edi Rama interfered in this process of territorial negotiation. Do you really believe that?
A: You’ll need to ask him. I don’t think the politicians in either Pristina or Tirana are going to be much interested in moving to the other place if Greater Albania comes into existence.
- If the division occurs, what are possible consequences for Kosovo but also for the region? Could this affect the situation in Macedonia, in Bosnia etc?
A: Yes, partition of Kosovo would end the presence of Serbs south of the Ibar, lead to instability in Macedonia and 3-way partition in Bosnia. None of that will occur peacefully.
- Kosovo has an obligation to make the Association of Serbian Municipalities but is afraid it can bring autonomy within Kosovo, that is, a sort of ‘Bosnification’. Can this be avoided?
A: The constitutional court has made it absolutely clear how this can be avoided.
- Is it practical the idea of holding a referendum on the end of talks with Serbia?
A: No.
- There are debates in Kosovo on who should lead the dialogue and there is an opposition to president Thaci. Who should, according to you, make a lead in the dialogue?
A: I think the Unity Team that conducted the Ahtisaari negotiations was a fine idea. I don’t know if it can repeated.
- Do you believe that the Haradinaj government, which barely has any numbers for its existence, will lead to the end of this process or should a country go to the elections and then enter the dialogue?
A: That’s a question for your President and parliament to answer, not me. The question is whether a new election would produce a clearer and more functional majority. It is hard to know in advance.
- What influence do you think Russia has in the region and Kosovo through Serbia in these developments?
A: Russia is doing its best to destabilize the region. It is opposing the “North Macedonia” referendum, it is arming Dodik’s police, and it is encouraging partition talk, from which Moscow stands to gain. I wouldn’t rule out another assassination attempt against one or another Balkan leader.
- Often, from various diplomats, Kosovo is asked to seek creative solutions. What kind of creativity is needed, regarding to you?
A: I’m in favor of the kind of creativity that makes Kosovo a NATO and EU member as soon as possible. That means no partition, equal treatment for all citizens, an Association of Serb Municipalities within the parameters laid out by the constitutional court, and a government committed not just to legislation consistent with the acquis communautaire but also to implementing the acquis as rapidly as possible.
- What is the role of EU in these developments around the talks, knowing that EU was mediator until now?
A: So far as I am aware, the EU is still mediator and will preside over any discussion of land (and people) swaps. I doubt Vucic and Thaci will come to any agreement. Each one wants what he wants without giving anything up. Thaci will want the north, especially the water supply there, to remain inside Kosovo. Vucic will not want to give municipalities to Kosovo that lie along Serbia’s main route to the sea. But even discussion of land swaps can be destabilizing and lead to serious problems in the region and beyond. If I were Vucic and Thaci, I would want to avoid being blamed for that.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Partition is not the solution
Agron Bajrami, editor in chief of Pristina daily Koha Ditore writes at kathimerini.gr:
The idea that Kosovo and Serbia could reach a comprehensive final agreement within the EU mediated dialogue has sparked a lot of enthusiasm, especially in the West which would like to see the open issues in Balkans closed so that the whole of the region could move towards integration within EU and NATO.
But the discussions that have been incited by the idea of a final Kosovo-Serbia “normalization” deal have so far gone in the opposite direction, away from European solutions.
The most un-European proposal that we heard so far in this debate, was the increasing talk from Serbian side about Kosovo partition. Even the President of Serbia, Aleksandar Vucic, has talked about it, while Serbian Foreign Minister Ivica Dacic is publicly favoring partition for quite some time – even calling it “the best solution”.
These Serbian statements were followed by clear signs that Kosovo president Hashim Thaçi might be willing to enter such negotiations. Furthermore, he also used the opportunity to include into discussions the Preshevo Valley – an Albanian-majority region in Southern Serbia.
While most of the political parties and other leaders in Kosovo reject these ideas, claiming rightly that Kosovo status and its borders were permanently settled in 2008, Thaçi and Vucic seem to be ready to agree on some sort of territorial solution, insisting it is the “best” and even the “only” solution.
Nothing could be further from truth.
Once we accept that changing the borders is a solution, it will not stop at Kosovo-Serbia line. It will spread to the whole of the region, from Skopje to Sarajevo, with Bosnia and Hercegovina situation being particularly explosive. Change of borders – which Thaçi and some others euphemistically call “border correction” – will also mean partition on ethnic basis, and exchange of territories. And – as history taught us – where territories cannot be exchanged, population exchange will follow.
Hence, the whole region would return to the time of the conflicts, not unlike the ones we have witnessed during the 1990’s, and all the work done in the last 20 years to bring peace to the people of Balkans will be disregarded overnight.
In this context, it is highly unfortunate, disgraceful even, that EU High Representative Federica Mogherini, under whose facilitation the Kosovo-Serbia dialogue takes place, has kept silent in the face of ethnic partition talks. EU might be tempted to accept any kind of deal that two sides agree, but that would make Brussels equally responsible for the disaster that will certainly follow if Kosovo partition is legitimized as an option.
Because, even if all the negative effects could be limited to Kosovo only, it will be a monumental disaster; it would run against the European idea of multiethnic and multicultural democracies, which is enshrined in the Ahtisaari proposal that served as the basis for Kosovo’s 2008 declaration of independence.
Of course, Ahtisaari plan has never been fully implemented also due to refusal of Serbia to agree with it, and there are still issues to be addressed related to minority and religious rights. But, giving up on that idea and returning to the ethnic based solutions will only push all of us back to conflicts and further instability.
That should not be allowed to happen.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
You don’t need to know a lot of history
I tweeted to Kosovo President Thaci on Friday:
.
@HashimThaciRKS: do you really want to open for renegotiation the deal with the US and most of the EU that got your state recognition? This could end very badly.
He responded:
Dear
@DanielSerwer, I’m committed deeply to obtain#Kosovo‘s membership in@NATO and EU. Based on values we share. Based on need to ensure safety of our children. We need to close a chapter that brings about reciprocal recognition & good neighborly relations between RKS & SRB.I’m against partition. I’m against swaps. I’m against status quo. I’m against making a Republica Srpska in
#Kosovo. But I’m in favor to peaceful demarcation and settling the 400km long border between Kosovo and Serbia. Balanced agreement is in all our interests, incl US & EU.
I prefer to respond here rather than on Twitter, which doesn’t work well for complex issues. This one is complex.
I share the President’s goals: NATO and EU membership, recognition, and good neighborly relations between Kosovo and Serbia. I am also against partition and land swaps, and a Republika Srpska (RS) in Kosovo (that is part of Kosovo that de facto escapes Pristina’s sovereignty, like the RS in Bosnia). Peaceful demarcation of the border is vital. You can look long and hard for two countries with good relations that have not agreed on and demarcated their border.
So what’s the problem? Just this: President Thaci has responded to Serbian President Vucic’s constant harping on partition of Kosovo with the suggestion that Kosovo would like to absorb at least some of the Albanian-populated communities in southern Serbia. Never mind that Serbia’s main route to the sea is adjacent to those Albanian communities and that Kosovo’s main water supply is the Serb-controlled north. The tit-for-tat presidential speculation on partition opens what diplomats call Pandora’s box: border changes throughout the Balkans that would necessarily involve significant populations and land areas.
Calling it “border correction” and associating it with demarcation does nothing to lessen the broad and dramatic impact an attempt to redraw borders along ethnic lines would entail. Consider this from Father Sava on his Facebook page today:
Acceptance of ethnic partition between Serbs and Albanians in Kosovo by territorial division, forcing 70.000 Serbs south of the partition line to an imminent exodus and leaving their holy sites in peril would mean that EU accepts the idea of an AGREED ETHNIC CLEANSING as a legitimate solution.
This would be a dangerous precedent with unforeseeable consequences which would inevitably encourage replication of such a model throughout the continent. EU member states are before a critical historical responsibility if this scenario is politically supported. This will bring us back to the tragic years of the ex-Yu wars in the 90ies.
Meanwhile, Republika Srpska President Dodik is declaring:
I think that BiH [Bosnia and Herzegovina] will not survive and that it will peacefully dissolve.
He knows that there is no possibility of a peaceful dissolution and has been arming his police with weapons from Russia to ensure that RS is ready to defend its secession when the time comes. That would of course lead to the expulsion of the (relatively few) Croats and Bosniaks who have returned to RS and might imperil the Serbs in the Bosnian Federation as well. The net result would likely be a non-viable Islamic Republic in central Bosnia that could readily become an extremist safe haven.
In Macedonia, there is a real risk that more extreme ethnic nationalists of both the Albanian and Macedonian varieties will benefit from the atmosphere that these partition fantasies are creating. That could lead to defeat of the September 30 referendum on the agreement that would end the more than 25-year dispute with Greece over the country’s name. NATO and EU membership would then become impossible and agitation in favor of an infeasible partition would become inevitable.
The implications for the secessionist regions of Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine are all too obvious. President Putin couldn’t hope for more.
Why is this happening? In part because the US has an ethnic nationalist administration whose erstwhile chief strategist, Steve Bannon, is running around pushing ethnic partition while former Trump campaign officials sign up lobbying clients like Dodik and Vucic. The lobbyists don’t care how much trouble their schemes may cause, but those who are actually governing in Washington, European capitals, and Brussels should. You don’t need to know a lot of history to know how easily conflicting ethnic territorial claims in the Balkans can lead to instability, and instability to much worse.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Peace picks – August 13 – 19
1. Discussion – Indian Railways and coal: An unsustainable interdependency | Monday, August 13, 2018 | 3:30 pm – 5:00 pm | Brookings Institution | Register Here
Coal is a key part of the equilibrium of Indian Railways since passenger fares don’t cover all the costs. Unfortunately, this equilibrium is at risk. Already the average distance of coal travelled has fallen 30 per cent in five years. Raising coal freight fares disproportionately compared to its distance and volume has led to higher cost of coal delivered and therefore to higher electricity costs for consumers – by approximately 10 paise/kWh across India. This is unsustainable.
Even more worryingly for the equilibrium is the rise of renewable energy and improved efficiency of power plants – these will lead to historical growth of coal transport coming down measurably. Indian Railways business model of “overcharging” coal while keeping passenger fares low could lead to coal (and thus thermal electricity) becoming uncompetitive.
This is a public event. RSVP pkamboj@brookingsindia.org to attend.
Speakers:
Moderator: Rahul Tongia – Fellow, Brookings India
Rakesh Mohan – Distinguished Fellow, Brookings India; former Deputy Governor of the Reserve Bank of India; and formerly Chairman, National Transport Development Policy Committee
Vivek Sahai – Distinguished Fellow, Observer Research Foundation; and former Chairman, Railway Board
Girish Pillai – Member (Traffic), Railway Board
2. Iran: Protests, Sanctions, and Regime Viability | Wednesday, August 15, 2018 | 12:00 pm – 1:30 pm | Hudson Institute | Register Here
On August 6, President Trump officially snapped back sanctions on Iran as part of his “Maximum Pressure” campaign on the country. This is the second concrete step taken by the administration this year, following their formal withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action in May. The restored sanctions prohibit transactions by countries and private entities involving everything from dollar notes and gold to commercial aircraft. The decision to reimpose these sanctions has drawn opposition from Iran and U.S. allies alike.
Given recent protests in the country over economic woes and ineffective government, the sanctions come at a particularly challenging time for Iran. What remains to be seen is whether new economic pressure will prompt Iran to revive its nuclear ambitions or pressure Tehran into renegotiating a nuclear accord.
On August 15, Hudson Institute will host a panel to discuss Iran, the effectiveness of the U.S. “Maximum Pressure” campaign, the regime’s ability to navigate sanctions, and the country’s widening protests. Panelists will include Michael Pregent, Hudson Institute senior fellow; Alireza Nader, an independent Iran scholar; Behnam Ben Taleblu, a research fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies; and Mariam Memarsadeghi, co-founder and co-director of Tavaana.
3. Brazil’s Election Takes Shape | Thursday, August 16, 2018 | 10:00 am – 10:45 am | Atlantic Council | Register Here
Note: Conference call dial-in information will be sent to participants two days prior to the event.
Latin America’s largest democracy officially kicks off one of its most consequential presidential contests on August 16. Over 14 candidates are vying for the presidency, with five standouts. How might the campaign take shape in the lead-up to the first round on October 7?
Join us via conference call on the day that the campaign officially begins—Thursday, August 16—for a conversation from 10:00 to 10:45 a.m. EDT, in partnership with the Brazilian Center for International Relations (CEBRI), on what to look for during the campaign and how Brazil’s next president may tackle some of the key issues necessary for Brazil to enter a new era of growth and stability.
For a preview of our conversation, keep an eye out for Ricardo Sennes’ Spotlight publication, to be launched on August 9, where he dissects the potential implications of political and economic reform, foreign direct investment, and security policies laid out by Jair Bolsonaro, Marina Silva, Ciro Gomes, Geraldo Alckmin, and Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva as the PT nominee.
Speakers:
Roberta Braga – Associate Director, Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center, Atlantic Council
Ricardo Sennes – Nonresident Senior Brazil Fellow, Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center, Atlantic Council; Co-Founder, Prospectiva Consulting
Roberto Teixeira da Costa – Member, Board of Trustees, Brazilian Center for International Relations (CEBRI)
Henrique Rzezinski – Member, Board of Trustees, Brazilian Center for International Relations (CEBRI)
4. Turkey Sanctions – Navigating a Historic Bilateral Crisis | Thursday, August 16, 2018 | 12:00 pm – 2:00 pm | The Washington Institute for Near East Policy | Register Here
Earlier this month, the Trump administration issued sanctions against Turkey for its continued detention of American pastor Andrew Brunson. Ties between the two governments have been under strain for years, but the latest incident has seemingly touched off the most severe crisis in recent memory, including a plunge in Turkish economic indicators. As the historic dispute unfolds, what are the future prospects and pitfalls for the bilateral relationship?
To discuss these issues, The Washington Institute is pleased to host a Policy Forum with Amanda Sloat, Max Hoffman, and Steven Cook, moderated by Institute senior fellow Soner Cagaptay.
Amanda Sloat is a Robert Bosch Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institution’s Center on the United States and Europe. Previously, she served as deputy assistant secretary for Southern Europe and Eastern Mediterranean affairs at the State Department.
Max Hoffman is the associate director of national security and international policy at the Center for American Progress, focusing on Turkey, the Kurdish regions, and U.S. defense policy, among other issues.
Steven Cook is the Eni Enrico Mattei Senior Fellow for Middle East and Africa Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations. An expert on Turkish politics, he has appeared in numerous international media outlets, including as a columnist with Foreign Policy magazine.
This event will be held at The Washington Institute, 1111 19th Street NW, Suite 500, Washington, DC, 20036. It will also be broadcast live on our website.
RSS - Posts
